Puckline Thread

Question Johnny. Why did you opt for divisional games? Given the frequency in which the teams face one another don't these tend to be closer game? I would think non-conference games would lead to more lop-sided finals.
 
Question Johnny. Why did you opt for divisional games? Given the frequency in which the teams face one another don't these tend to be closer game? I would think non-conference games would lead to more lop-sided finals.

Zeke, I've been digging into betlabs for a while cause I dont know sql. BL is an interesting way to test scenarios. Maybe this is one of those cases that the results of the last 3 years goes against conventional wisdom. Idk. It is a fairly straightforward model to get the general outcomes, I fine tune with streak data and game #.

Cause, for instance, when you look at the last 3 years. It's clear that there is a period between games 9 and 16 that this approach does not work. I will skip.

I like it cause I can never bet faves ml otherwise. I cant pay that juice. Not sure what % of games end in 1 goal difference. I tend to think the higher the ML the higher the chance its ends 1 goal difference when you reach a point approaching -200

The plays I filter for are much more reasonable and therefore attractive on PL.

This is just one approach. I'm sure a non conference/ division model is there to be created.

This may have some drawdowns that are unexpected but I like the idea of doing the same thing 160 times and seeing how it goes. Otherwise, god knows what would sway me each day making my wagers.
 
I think your final point rings most true to me at this point. After 15+ years of going at it with a lot of pure "feeling" betting I am of the opinion that strict, disciplined model betting is the way to go. Especially in this era where there is so much data at our fingertips. Obviously this style of betting is easier in some sports more than others. Baseball has far more predictive variables that we can exploit. Hockey tends to be a little more difficult in my experience. Too often, I KNOW a team should win a particular hockey game but it is lost by a fluke bounce, bad penalty, or even a loss in the shoot out.

Strict model betting over the long haul I think is the way to go, it keeps the emotion and psychology out of it and sticks to just pure facts and math. I am having more fun than I've ever had in Hockey betting using this method. To be profitable will be the icing on the cake.

..Sorry for hijacking Johnny.. lol..
 
Flyers are an absolute train wreck. They're my team too and I can go on and on about their deficiencies. They're a total mess. I feel bad for anyone betting on them.

Johnny wins again! Great play my friend!
 
Flyers are an absolute train wreck. They're my team too and I can go on and on about their deficiencies. They're a total mess. I feel bad for anyone betting on them.

Johnny wins again! Great play my friend!

I just can NOT BELIEVE that bunch from Philly BEAT my VGK the first game of the season @ T-Mobile with that SIEVE Elliott "OUCH" in goal :mad:
 
I think your final point rings most true to me at this point. After 15+ years of going at it with a lot of pure "feeling" betting I am of the opinion that strict, disciplined model betting is the way to go. Especially in this era where there is so much data at our fingertips. Obviously this style of betting is easier in some sports more than others. Baseball has far more predictive variables that we can exploit. Hockey tends to be a little more difficult in my experience. Too often, I KNOW a team should win a particular hockey game but it is lost by a fluke bounce, bad penalty, or even a loss in the shoot out.

Strict model betting over the long haul I think is the way to go, it keeps the emotion and psychology out of it and sticks to just pure facts and math. I am having more fun than I've ever had in Hockey betting using this method. To be profitable will be the icing on the cake.

..Sorry for hijacking Johnny.. lol..

Anytime peel. You said it better than I could.

Thanks bros. It's nice to win a few at the beginning.
 
Back
Top